Review of the Research Program of the U.S. DRIVE Partnership Fourth Report (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Vehicle Subsystems
3 Vehicle Subsystems
Pages 53-111
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 53... ...
hydrogen storage onboard a vehicle; (4) electrochemical energy storage or technologies for storing electricity onboard a vehicle; (5)
|
From page 54... ...
The goals, technical targets, and program structure of the ACEC technical team build on those from the FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership, which in turn built on the goals and targets from the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV)
|
From page 55... ...
DRIVE Partnership addressed three engine technology pathways: (1) hybrid optimized (low-level power density)
|
From page 56... ...
Howden, Department of Energy, "Advanced Combustion and Emission Control Technical Team," presentation to the committee, January 26, 2012, Washington, D.C.
|
From page 57... ...
; and the exhaust-gas aftertreatment system (PM traps, NOx reduction systems, CO and HC oxidation systems, etc.) for minimum fuel consumption while meeting emissions standards.
|
From page 58... ...
DRIVE ACEC technical team engages with research activities on combustion and emission controls is through the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's)
|
From page 59... ...
This activity helps in the development of emission control models that are integrated into vehicle simulations for drive-cycle analysis within the vehicle systems and analysis technical team (VSATT)
|
From page 60... ...
This imposes challenging constraints on the cost-benefit assessment of implementing energy recovery systems in the exhaust, and on maintaining a highly efficient exhaust-gas aftertreatment system. The fundamental research being pursued on exhaust-gas energy recovery within the ACEC technical team is to develop energy recovery systems that maximize the conversion of usable exhaust energy in ways that are economically viable.
|
From page 61... ...
DRIVE Partnership officials commented that natural gas is not included in the Partnership's technical scope. The committee believes that in light of the increased supply of natural gas and the high interest in using it to displace petroleum, an assessment should be made of whether natural gas is in any way an enabler for achieving U.S.
|
From page 62... ...
Funding Even though the U.S. DRIVE Partnership's ACEC technical team does not exercise control over a budget, it did offer to the committee an overview of the DOE funding within the advanced combustion and emission control programs for FY 2010 through FY 2012 (see Figure 3-2)
|
From page 63... ...
The ACEC technical team has demonstrated a number of successes both in the control of LTC and in expanding its operational range within the engine duty cycle. One example of this success is a project at ANL where researchers were able to use 87 research octane number (RON)
|
From page 64... ...
was developed. Conclusions The ACEC technical team is making good progress.
|
From page 65... ...
FUEL CELLS Fuel cell vehicles, under development globally, are based on a technology that can ultimately result in a zero-emissions and fossil-fuel-free option for transportation applications, and can help meet the vision of the U.S. DRIVE Partnership.
|
From page 66... ...
DRIVE Partnership and its predecessor organizations will be achieved. Regardless of the source of the hydrogen, the development of a production and distribution infrastructure is clearly essential for the possible success of widespread hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (see Chapter 4)
|
From page 67... ...
This continuity is critical, as the programs that have survived the go/no-go decisions are the ones deemed to have the most significant potential. 8 See DOE's Annual Merit Reviews, at http://www.annualmeritreview.energy.gov/.
|
From page 68... ...
Epping Martin, Department of Energy, "Fuel Cell Technical Team," presentation to the committee, January 26, 2012, Washington, D.C. There are new programs, but the number and magnitude have been limited.
|
From page 69... ...
As a result, advancements and scientific findings in each area must be thoroughly communicated, including to the industrial partners who will ultimately fabricate the MEA in high volumes. An assessment of the interrelationships of the fuel cell technical team with associated organizations indicates that the dissemination of information is taking place at the appropriate level on the membrane and electrode topics.
|
From page 70... ...
DRIVE Partnership have developed additional mechanisms by which the key fuel cell issues are addressed. Although the programs highlighted above are selected through the DOE solicitation-proposal process, working groups have been formed to facilitate better communication among the stakeholders and are also being asked to focus on the most critical needs (e.g., durability, modelng, and catalysis)
|
From page 71... ...
basis for the fuel cell system, not including onboard hydrogen storage.
|
From page 72... ...
In addition to component costs, manufacturing processes must be efficient in leading to a high yield of finished goods. The membrane electrode assembly, the heart of the power generation unit, is a complicated and costly five-layer package composed of membranes and catalyst layers sandwiched between gas diffusion media.
|
From page 73... ...
Epping Figure Department of Energy, "Fuel Cell G Martin, 3-5 Technical Team," presentation to the committee, January 26, 2012, Washington, D.C.; and S atyapal, Department of Energy, "Fuel Cell Technologies Overview," presentation to S the committee, December 5, 2011, Washington, D.C.; Sunita (2011)
|
From page 74... ...
Although the OEMs are making progress, what is reported to the committee is not necessarily derived from the most recent technical advancements, but rather from older vehicle performance test programs that take time to develop statistically significant and meaningful results. These results then provide direction to the fuel cell technical team, followed by DOE solicitations.
|
From page 75... ...
DRIVE Partnership programs. Furthermore, investigations on fundamental issues related to durability and performance have been expanded in scope and have begun to yield insight not only into degradation mechanisms but also in terms of providing guidance for developing next-generation catalysts and electrodes.
|
From page 76... ...
Fuel cell development is an important element of the U.S. DRIVE Partnership and, if successful, the chances of meeting the long-term goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and U.S.
|
From page 77... ...
Recommendation 3-4. The DOE should increase efforts for the cost reduction initiatives for fuel cells taking into account the entire system, including balance of plant.
|
From page 78... ...
DRIVE Partnership as a whole given the criticality of hydrogen storage to the performance of PEM fuel-cell-powered vehicles. The hydrogen storage system characteristics determine the amount of hydrogen that can be stored on the vehicle and the corresponding miles traveled between refueling as well as fuel storage costs.11 Materials-based solutions are the long-term option for onboard hydrogen storage.
|
From page 79... ...
Los Alamos National Laboratory, the lead laboratory for the Chemical Hydrogen Storage COE, worked closely with PNNL and other partners. A major accomplishment of the center was to demonstrate that chemical reprocessing of spent fuel is feasible.
|
From page 80... ...
• Hydrogen Storage Engineering COE. The more recently established Hydrogen Storage Engineering COE at Savannah River National Labo ratory (SRNL)
|
From page 81... ...
Cost is an issue for all technologies. The key system issues and challenges have been identified in terms of the following criteria: • Sufficient storage for driving range without impacting vehicle performance, • Kinetics, • Safety, • Capacities, TABLE 3-4 Onboard Hydrogen Storage Technical Targets, 2010, 2017, and Ultimately Target Units 2010 2017 Ultimate System gravimetric density wt% 4.5 5.5 7.5 kWh/kg 1.5 1.8 2.5 System volumetric density g/L 28 40 70 kWh/L 0.9 1.3 2.3 System fill time for 5-kg fill min 4.2 3.3 2.5 kg H2/min 1.2 1.5 2 System cost $/kg H2 TBD TBD TBD $/kWhnet Minimum delivery temperature °C –40 –40 –40 Maximum delivery temperature °C 85 85 85 Minimum full flow rate (g H2/s)
|
From page 82... ...
led to a decision to stop hydrolysis program work. Project down-selects by the Hydrogen Storage Engineering COE have resulted in phasing out work on metal hydrides (75 percent discontinued)
|
From page 83... ...
This work has enabled the COE to down-select systems for further development. Compressed hydrogen is the near-term option for onboard hydrogen storage.
|
From page 84... ...
A workshop with various stakeholders was held in February 2011 to address opportunities for cost reduction of composite storage tanks. 16 In December 2011, DOE announced four projects totaling more than $7 million to advance hydrogen storage technologies for fuel cell electric vehicles.
|
From page 85... ...
projections HRL Laboratories, LLC 1.20 Innovative approach to hydrogen storage using engineered liquids that absorb and release hydrogen gas LBNL with NIST, GM 2.10 Theory-guided synthesis of novel hydrogen storage materials University of Oregon with 2.00 Develop and test promising new University of Alabama, PNNL, chemical storage materials Protonex Technology NOTE: PNNL, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; LBNL, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; NIST, National Institute of Standards and Technology. SOURCE: See www.EERE.energy.gov/hydrogen&fuelcell/news.
|
From page 86... ...
The NRC (2010) Phase 3 report recommended that, given the critical part that hydrogen storage is to the hydrogen and fuel cell part of the FreedomCar and Fuel Partnership, it should continue to be funded, and the funding should include the work of the Hydrogen Storage Engineering COE.
|
From page 87... ...
The U.S. DRIVE Partnership should investigate the relationship between the onboard hydrogen storage tank pressure and the hydrogen infrastructure so that trade-offs can be worked out.
|
From page 88... ...
. (Fuel cell electric vehicles have evolved into fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles that utilize electrochemical energy storage systems to capture regenerative braking energy and to provide for a smaller fuel cell system with optimized efficiency operation.)
|
From page 89... ...
automotive companies are at the forefront of advanced battery technology for electric drive vehicles. The DOE Vehicle Technologies Program, in collaboration with the USABC, manages the electrochemical energy storage technology activities with a goal of the advancement of electrochemical energy storage technologies, to enable the U.S.
|
From page 90... ...
. Current Status Versus Goals and Targets Overall the goal is to develop electrochemical energy storage systems that will enable electric drive vehicles that can substantially reduce both U.S.
|
From page 91... ...
. TABLE 3-7 Department of Energy Technical Targets for Energy Storage Technologies for Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs)
|
From page 92... ...
Technical Targets Need Revision Over the years, a variety of detailed technical targets for electrochemical energy storage systems for a variety of electric drive vehicle applications have TABLE 3-8 Status of Electric Vehicle Battery Performance, Current Status Versus Technical Targets for All-Electric Vehicles (AEVs) , 2020 Energy Storage Goals AEV (2020)
|
From page 93... ...
It is time to take advantage of the past two decades of substantial progress, experience, and learning about electric drive vehicle applications to start over and develop a technically sound and consistent set of technical targets for electrohemical energy storage systems aimed at the key applications under c development: • Hybrid Electric Vehicles -- Stop-start micro HEVs -- Mild HEVs -- Full HEVs -- PHEVs, both blended and all-electric range types • Battery Electric Vehicles -- Commuter BEVs (<100 mile range) -- Touring BEVs (300 mile range)
|
From page 94... ...
General U.S. DRIVE Partnership achievements in electrochemical energy storage (DOE, 2012b)
|
From page 95... ...
• A multiscale, multidimensional model framework developed by NREL was used to initiate programs in multiphysics battery modeling to pro vide computer-aided engineering tools to the Li-ion battery industry. Significant Barriers and Issues The most serious barrier in the area of electrochemical energy storage is the high cost of batteries, which generally comprises the highest cost component of
|
From page 96... ...
The cost targets for electric drive vehicles20 are as follows: • $125/kWh for battery electric vehicles (DOE target for 2020) , • $300/kWh for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (DOE target for 2015)
|
From page 97... ...
NRC Phase 3 Recommendation 3-17. The Partnership should significantly intensify its efforts to develop improved materials and systems for high-en ergy batteries for both plug-in electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles.
|
From page 98... ...
c The U.S. DRIVE Partnership technical targets for electrochemical energy storage systems are largely outdated and contain some significant inconsistencies and unclear constructions.
|
From page 99... ...
These activities are not under the U.S. DRIVE Partnership but do reflect the importance of the electric propulsion development effort.
|
From page 100... ...
Thus reducing the cost, weight, and volume is an important and worthwhile objective, and the funds allocated for this activity are appropriate. Current Status Versus Targets The electric propulsion and electrical systems targets have been met for 2010, including the cost, weight, and volume targets for the electric motor, power electronics, and traction drive system efficiency.
|
From page 101... ...
AC Propulsion is already marketing such a system, and it is being used in the Tesla and BMW Mini electric vehicles. It is hoped that the proposed project endeavors to improve on these production systems.
|
From page 102... ...
Rogers, Department of Energy, "Electrical and Electronics Technical Team," presentation to the committee, January 26, 2012, Washington, D.C. 29 See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/hybridCompare.jsp.
|
From page 103... ...
Response to Recommendations from Phase 3 Review NRC Phase 3 Recommendation 3-19. The Partnership should continue to focus on activities to reduce the cost, size, and losses in the power electronics and electrical machines.
|
From page 104... ...
DRIVE Partnership should revisit Phase 3 (NRC, 2010) , Recommendation 3-20.
|
From page 105... ...
The U.S. DRIVE Partnership should make a comprehensive assessment of the various methods available (some of these are discussed in the section titled "Thermal Management" in this chapter)
|
From page 106... ...
The materials technical team has estimated that each 1.0 lb of primary weight reduction may enable 1.0 to 1.5 lb of secondary weight reduction, provided that the entire vehicle can be redesigned to capture this opportunity. Nevertheless, large-scale weight reduction is an extremely challenging task, particularly since the addition of enhanced fuel-efficiency systems such as electrification results in the opposite effect, namely, mass compounding.
|
From page 107... ...
The materials technical team should develop a systems-analysis methodology to determine the currently most cost-effective way for achieving a 50 percent weight reduction for hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. The materials team needs to evaluate how the cost penalty changes as a function of the percent weight reduction, assuming that the most effective mix of materials is used at each step in the weight-reduction process.
|
From page 108... ...
This will provide a better understanding of how die-casting characteristics affect ductility, in turn providing insight for methods to improve ductility. NRC Phase 3 Recommendation 3-24.
|
From page 109... ...
Furthermore, numerous vehicle demonstration projects have been conducted in the past, both by materials trade associations and by industry consortia, some of which were sponsored by DOE. As noted in Chapter 2, the committee applauds the appointment by each technical team of an associate member.
|
From page 110... ...
This work could also potentially help to reduce the cost of high-pressure hydrogen storage tanks. Recommendation 3-18.
|
From page 111... ...
2012. "Hydrogen Storage Overview." Presentation at the DOE Annual Merit Review, May 15, Arlington, Va.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.